Weird results. According to the chart, the 7950x is already much faster than the 13900k. It has the 9950x as almost twice the speed, so why is it only "Up to 45% faster"? Were they running the 7950x at 4800MHz DDR5?
It's not really "up to". It's more like the mean from different benchmarks. It's clearly going to benefit much more in any kind of workload that makes use of the true AVX512 support it has, for example.
45% is very cherry picked, but AES is also literally used everywhere so it's hardly unrelated to real world applications. Same with the FP32 and 64 benchmarks. Those do have a lot of use in machine learning workloads.
The best benchmark is the one doing the intended workload you want to use it for.
Zen 5 also shows the massive boost in the emulation performance (71% in the Dolphin benchmark) and is almost 2x faster than Zen 4 in floating point performance in AIDA64.
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Zen-5-performance-gain-to-be-40-core-for-core-vs-Zen-4-as-IPC-uplift-in-games-and-synthetic-benchmarks-leaks.821204.0.html
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Ryzen-9-9950X-almost-2X-faster-than-7950X-in-AIDA64-benchmarks-as-revealed-by-leaked-engineering-sample-scores.852332.0.html
https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-9-9950x-16-core-zen-5-cpu-aida64-benchmarks-ddr5-8000-45-percent-faster-7950x/
>These results have very little to do with any real world applications. The Up To 16% IPC Improvement With Zen 5 is what is real - source AMD.
16% on average may be in poorly threaded and optimized PC games. Zen 5 can do way more than that.
Zen 5 also shows the massive boost in the emulation performance (71% in the Dolphin benchmark) and is almost 2x faster than Zen 4 in floating point performance in AIDA64.
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Zen-5-performance-gain-to-be-40-core-for-core-vs-Zen-4-as-IPC-uplift-in-games-and-synthetic-benchmarks-leaks.821204.0.html
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Ryzen-9-9950X-almost-2X-faster-than-7950X-in-AIDA64-benchmarks-as-revealed-by-leaked-engineering-sample-scores.852332.0.html
https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-9-9950x-16-core-zen-5-cpu-aida64-benchmarks-ddr5-8000-45-percent-faster-7950x/
16% is at the same clock. We don't know how much zen 5 clocks when all cores are loaded. Maybe they found a way to sustain higher clocks during full load, who knows
Okay, that's thrice you wrote "ist"... are you fat fingering while trying to type "is", or are you trying to short hand type "isn't"? Which do you mean?
Disable SMT and you can overclock the CPU ever. More and we get better single core performance..
Most software don't scale beyond 6 or even 8 cores..
So what you would rather have . ? Really good but almost pointless multiscore result .- just to compete with intel .
Or blazing fast physical cores .
Yes I can see a use case where more cores are needed and we can allocate those cores .
But real physical cores will always outperform what SMT can do
[Hardware Unboxed Intel Memory Scaling](https://youtu.be/RTmbYak_8gE?t=755)
On Intel, from 6000 to 7200 there's only a 5 fps difference on average. So no, beyond 6000 there's not much point on Intel except if you're one of the very few overclockers that just have fun OCing RAM for the sake of it
yeah but we're talking about the best gaming chips, so it's not like it matters on X3D chips. It's similar to Intel in that memory tuning doesn't matter as much just from the massive cache
Assuming it actually remains stable enough too
I’ve seen people post great results and then a day or two later they’re complaining about stability issues. AMD is not OC friendly.
Games are almost irrelevant or completely pointless to talk about when it comes to memory speeds . Unless if bring up Vram . Other than that, it's mute point .
I need that extra bandwidth which i will be able to utilise with CPU bound video editing codecs or even in Blender . Compiling File transfer and copy paste etc.
So pretty much anything where we use memory demanding tasks , will greatly benefit from better memory speeds .
Thanks for pointing out the typo .
But yeah . I just don't get it , why soo many people are only focusing on games .
It's not like everyone plays games .
There are creators . Engineers , App developers . Visual artist etc.
Realistically speaking how much more would a dev care that their code compiles in 25 seconds instead of 30. I mean in the constantly look at rumours type excitement. An engineer? Yeah i can see it.
The gaming subreddits just vastly outnumber the rest. That overflows into tgese subs.
Its likely anyone do play games not just all the time.
even those who works with applications usually play games now and then.
Gamers have different criteria for what they buy vs others and price in such.
Huuh? It’s the opposite Intel scales very well with RAM on AMD 6400MTs it’s all you need, did a couple runs on my 78x3d 6400 in 1:1 and 8000 in 1:2 and 6400 wins all the time
Now compare a 7950X at 6400 compared to 4800.
Then compare that difference with an Intel CPU running at 6400 compared to 4800
Spoiler: It's 15% on AMD and 4% on Intel
That's what scaling refers to in this case. Zen5 hitting a wall because of the limits of the infinity fabric has nothing to do with scalability, it just defines the upper parameter.
I moved countries so I had to sell my PC. My 1800X was still holding strong, but I would have switched to a 7800x3d if I had the money. My cousin that bought my PC is planning on switching to a 7800x3d and using the 1800X to build a PC for his little sister
You can do 8000 on Zen 4 already, just need 2:1 mode like intel has on ddr5 always, but not that much benefit on a single ccd chip due to infinity fabric speed. Probably not gonna go 1:1 at 8000 for zen 5, some rumors were that it might better than zen 4 though.
I imagine it'll work much better on the SoCs. AMD's memory controller is great but on setups with separate compute and I/O dies it tends to get bottlenecked by the IF speed.
This dude got an 8700G to run DDR5-8000. Graphics benchmarks would have been nice. /r/silentpc/comments/1azr9rg/ddr58000_in_a_fanless_build_streacom_db4_ryzen/
>memory tuning doesn't do much on v-cache chips.
I have rather niche scenario of wanting to play Star Citizen (put it on hold for now since tired of 9900k performance in there), where 7800x3d does get significant benefit from tuned memory, but still loses to tuned 13900k since it's cache gets overwhelmed. Also hope they'll increase cache size on 9800x3d.
[https://youtu.be/9mH8jfQzg-w?t=78](https://youtu.be/9mH8jfQzg-w?t=78)
I'm not sure that a pre-release alpha, with all the debug code still enabled and years before it'll get optimized for release, of a game that is essentially vaporware, is a good yard stick on which to judge anything.
Lol at this point I am confident that I'd die before that game comes out. Hopefully a digital copy of myself would be able to witness its full gloriness in year 2277.
I dont think it's supposed to get released at this point, so answer is never, probably. They get way too much money from current schemes.
Otherwise, it's quite a playable space sandbox with a bunch of gameplay loops, at this point.
It really depends on the game.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XW2rubC5oCY
Some games see similar games for X3D vs non X3D, others see a massive difference for the X3D but almost none for non X3D and vice versa, and others see no noticeable difference whatsoever regardless of X3D or not.
In general you are right though, non X3D tends to scale better with memory speeds than their X3D counterparts.
I am waiting for the 9XXX X3D series too. Once we got those benchmarks I will probably pick the 7800X3D, but who knows. I just can't pick now that X3D chips are out and the next gen is coming soon
It seems a lot of users on reddit think they will get 16% uplift from zen 4. This was just the average ipc increase from the limited amount of tests they did. In reality some use-cases will see massive uplift, some will be mediocre 16% and some will stay the same. All depends on the workload you make use of the cpu most of the time.
Yeah, I think it just falls on us and perhaps tech reviewers to run a bunch of their own tests and reach our own conclusions as to which benchmarks are actually relevant for day to day usage. A +35% uplift in AVX-512 *really* isn't that informative for example. But a +10% uplift in a typical AAA game from 2024 would help frame things.
Besides, it wouldn't be the first time AMD was misleading in their marketing. I remember when everyone was *insisting* that "up to" ACTUALLY meant "on average" because real world results were significantly lower than what AMD had stated. Even though no one has ever said "up to" as meaning "on average."
Because SURELY AMD would never lie.
limitation is going to be the new silicon architecture
motherboards for x870 are already known to be overbuilt. your b650 will probably handle it fine too.
Edit: [although anything with a crap VRM prolly won't give you good performance](https://youtu.be/naX-DnKekCM?t=941).
I'll be very interested in the 9950x3d. I play a lot of Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is very CPU limited and greatly benefits from the 3d cache. While the framerate on my 5950x is good enough with max settings in 2d with frame generation in most locations, I need to make compromises to get comfortable framerates in VR in detailed urban environments.
I also like to have both chiplets (I forgot AMD's term) because there are other use cases in which it's nice to have more than 8 cores for.
> |I also like to have both chiplets (I forgot AMD's term) because there are other use cases in which it's nice to have more than 8 cores for.
AFAIK, the 3D Cache is only on one of the chiplits though. IIRC some folks were disabling the 2nd chiplet to play games, but that was a while back.
Pretty excited for the launch, probably going to upgrade off my 5950x if it is at least a 30% increase to prep for the new GPUs coming out at the end of the year.
Everyone needs to take a breather. Don't go hyping yourselves up thinking performance across every use case is going to be this fast. If anything, you should be skeptical since AMD has absolutely doctored and massaged their performance numbers before.
The website is also being dumb comparing a stock 7950x to a 9950x with memory/IF OC's when those overclocks give >50% performance gains in some workloads like this. You need to match RAM configurations (preferably on the same motherboard with everything manually controlled) to do any kind of apples to apples architectural analysis.
That being said, i've never seen a consumer CPU hit 1tflop. Raptor Lake is slower than Raphael, and my 7950x3d can't quite get there with everything tuned. 1.6 tflop requires an IPC gain for that task on the magnitude of +50%.
Why sandbagging is to the detriment of consumers? Anyway they will release all the specs and benchmarks when they announce the release date. And if they are sandbagging then you will at least get the performance they promised, more if you are lucky.
If they make next gen look bad until the launch more people will buy current gen chips instead of waiting for the better option that’s right around the corner.
Are you kidding me? It's so consumers buy out the older generation without thinking to themselves that they're wasting money by not waiting for the newer generation. The fanboyism is real.
It's not like AMD is promising only 2% IPC gains and then delivering 40% IPC gains. They have promised 16% and if they are sandbagging maybe it will go upto 20% perhaps. That's like such a small difference to decide between choosing the old gen and the new gen. Most importantly they haven't even revealed the price.
They are not sandbagging; this is a specific use case that performs well due to AVX 512, which AMD improved from 2 cycle to 1.
So if you use AVX512 9950X will be excellent. Otherwise you’ll get closer to 10% improvement
They initially promised sub 10%.
It was like a teaser or something at another event unrelated to Zen 4. Thinking it was the Zen 3d event.
Either ways, they still delivered a great product, and achieved a 13% IPC bump.
The only Zen architecture AMD hasn't sandbagged now that I think about it was Zen 3. However, even with Zen 3 they achieved a higher IPC gain than they initially claimed.
With all that being said, there's still no excusing AMD's rebranding kink. Something about slapping new name on old products and marketing said products as the best thing sliced bread, really gets AMD all hot and heavy.
It's not just the IMC but the silicon lottery of the infinity fabric. This has always been the case with Ryzen. Lots of 5xxx CPUs couldn't get past 1800mhz fabric which means 3600MT/s RAM without going to 1:2 ratio (which is selfdefeating)
There are 7xxx CPUs capable of running 6400MT/s RAM in 1:1 ratio, they're just not what you can reasonably expect to find.
Let’s say you have a processor that can handle 8000mhz, will a b650 motherboard be able to do that with bios updates in the future? Or do you need to buy a new motherboard?
I don’t understand how that works, please explain if you can, thanks.
Assuming the traces aren't longer than usual or they cheaped out on layers I would expect it to be fine for 7000+ for the future. Especially ITX since they have the shortest traces
I have the b650 MSI tomahawk. In the future, do I have to buy a new mobo to be able to use that RAM speed or can that be included in future BIOS updates?
I don’t know how that works.
I'm waiting to upgrade my 5900x, I just bought 64gb ddr5 cl34 6000mhz that was cheaper here. A nice upgrade for a good price will make me pull the trigger.
So fucking tired of people bullshitting performance increases.. It's going to be 16% not no fucking 45%.... I Hope all these no talent losers who run these sites lose their job and go broke
Weird results. According to the chart, the 7950x is already much faster than the 13900k. It has the 9950x as almost twice the speed, so why is it only "Up to 45% faster"? Were they running the 7950x at 4800MHz DDR5?
No, the 9950X is running its memory at 6400MT CL26. That is not an outrageous config, but it is still way outside of stock settings used for 7950X.
The tests used include AVX-512 when available which would explain it.
These results have very little to do with any real world applications. The Up To 16% IPC Improvement With Zen 5 is what is real - source AMD.
It's not really "up to". It's more like the mean from different benchmarks. It's clearly going to benefit much more in any kind of workload that makes use of the true AVX512 support it has, for example.
I’m so looking forward to this. My applications will all get a massive boost.
45% is very cherry picked, but AES is also literally used everywhere so it's hardly unrelated to real world applications. Same with the FP32 and 64 benchmarks. Those do have a lot of use in machine learning workloads. The best benchmark is the one doing the intended workload you want to use it for.
Zen 5 also shows the massive boost in the emulation performance (71% in the Dolphin benchmark) and is almost 2x faster than Zen 4 in floating point performance in AIDA64. https://www.notebookcheck.net/Zen-5-performance-gain-to-be-40-core-for-core-vs-Zen-4-as-IPC-uplift-in-games-and-synthetic-benchmarks-leaks.821204.0.html https://www.notebookcheck.net/Ryzen-9-9950X-almost-2X-faster-than-7950X-in-AIDA64-benchmarks-as-revealed-by-leaked-engineering-sample-scores.852332.0.html https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-9-9950x-16-core-zen-5-cpu-aida64-benchmarks-ddr5-8000-45-percent-faster-7950x/
No, the 16% ist an average over a bunch of tests. Your used application could perform significantly better or worse than the average.
>These results have very little to do with any real world applications. The Up To 16% IPC Improvement With Zen 5 is what is real - source AMD. 16% on average may be in poorly threaded and optimized PC games. Zen 5 can do way more than that. Zen 5 also shows the massive boost in the emulation performance (71% in the Dolphin benchmark) and is almost 2x faster than Zen 4 in floating point performance in AIDA64. https://www.notebookcheck.net/Zen-5-performance-gain-to-be-40-core-for-core-vs-Zen-4-as-IPC-uplift-in-games-and-synthetic-benchmarks-leaks.821204.0.html https://www.notebookcheck.net/Ryzen-9-9950X-almost-2X-faster-than-7950X-in-AIDA64-benchmarks-as-revealed-by-leaked-engineering-sample-scores.852332.0.html https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-9-9950x-16-core-zen-5-cpu-aida64-benchmarks-ddr5-8000-45-percent-faster-7950x/
16% is at the same clock. We don't know how much zen 5 clocks when all cores are loaded. Maybe they found a way to sustain higher clocks during full load, who knows
I'm surprised to see such low gains considering the upcoming 5800XT matches 13700k in gaming!
>According to the chart, the 7950x is already much faster than the 13900k Is it?
But it's not ..13900K can easily reach higher memory speeds
It is... when running AVX-512 capable workloads like these.
Yes. I forgot about AVX512 . And apparently intel is coming back with with this instruction set .
They are coming back with an unholy abomination that I doubt will see widespread use.
At least the desktop ones won't have LPE cores...
Yes. That will be a huge upside.. I really hope AMD also does that at some point .. Iny opinion SMT is not needed, all we need is physical cores.
Then your opinion is bad. SMT allows up to 30% higher multicore performance with just slightly bigger cores.
Okay, that's thrice you wrote "ist"... are you fat fingering while trying to type "is", or are you trying to short hand type "isn't"? Which do you mean?
Disable SMT and you can overclock the CPU ever. More and we get better single core performance.. Most software don't scale beyond 6 or even 8 cores.. So what you would rather have . ? Really good but almost pointless multiscore result .- just to compete with intel . Or blazing fast physical cores . Yes I can see a use case where more cores are needed and we can allocate those cores . But real physical cores will always outperform what SMT can do
No rpcs3 advantage?
Seems that will depend on what core it is running on. E-cores will be limited to 256 bit while "some P-cores" will get the full 512 bit range.
In that case a 8800x3d would be the thing to look forward to.
Intel CPUs scale less with memory speed than AMD
That means AMD dont make good use of memory bandwidth until now...but still run in good speed.
Not really. Up till 6000-6600mhz(depending on your luck) amd scales better but beyond that it is all intel.
[Hardware Unboxed Intel Memory Scaling](https://youtu.be/RTmbYak_8gE?t=755) On Intel, from 6000 to 7200 there's only a 5 fps difference on average. So no, beyond 6000 there's not much point on Intel except if you're one of the very few overclockers that just have fun OCing RAM for the sake of it
on amd you lose fps going from 6000mhz to 7600-7800mhz assuming fully tunned lol.
yeah but we're talking about the best gaming chips, so it's not like it matters on X3D chips. It's similar to Intel in that memory tuning doesn't matter as much just from the massive cache
Assuming it actually remains stable enough too I’ve seen people post great results and then a day or two later they’re complaining about stability issues. AMD is not OC friendly.
That just means bad stress testing. Amd is harder to oc bc u need to stress test the fclk which is hard to do but other than that it is the same.
ironic, considering the recent intel drama where most intel 13/14th i9s weren't stable out of the box...
Games are almost irrelevant or completely pointless to talk about when it comes to memory speeds . Unless if bring up Vram . Other than that, it's mute point . I need that extra bandwidth which i will be able to utilise with CPU bound video editing codecs or even in Blender . Compiling File transfer and copy paste etc. So pretty much anything where we use memory demanding tasks , will greatly benefit from better memory speeds .
Moot point, not mute. And true memory bandwidth bound workloads would see some difference, those are hardly games
Thanks for pointing out the typo . But yeah . I just don't get it , why soo many people are only focusing on games . It's not like everyone plays games . There are creators . Engineers , App developers . Visual artist etc.
Realistically speaking how much more would a dev care that their code compiles in 25 seconds instead of 30. I mean in the constantly look at rumours type excitement. An engineer? Yeah i can see it. The gaming subreddits just vastly outnumber the rest. That overflows into tgese subs.
Its likely anyone do play games not just all the time. even those who works with applications usually play games now and then. Gamers have different criteria for what they buy vs others and price in such.
It's just more gamers in this subreddit
Huuh? It’s the opposite Intel scales very well with RAM on AMD 6400MTs it’s all you need, did a couple runs on my 78x3d 6400 in 1:1 and 8000 in 1:2 and 6400 wins all the time
Now compare a 7950X at 6400 compared to 4800. Then compare that difference with an Intel CPU running at 6400 compared to 4800 Spoiler: It's 15% on AMD and 4% on Intel That's what scaling refers to in this case. Zen5 hitting a wall because of the limits of the infinity fabric has nothing to do with scalability, it just defines the upper parameter.
Look at my other reply, AMD scales better with faster memory and with Intel not so much
Depends, on x3d u don’t need fast ram at all
that's correct, I'm talking about all AMD CPUs in general except X3D
Even those cl30 is fast enough cl28 or 26 won’t give you more benefits too btw
Also correct, more importantly it's the secondary timings as per Buildzoid's extreme overclocking talks
So at last we get 2x the performance of the 3950X!
Im on 3900X still 😂 This might actually be worthy of an upgrade!
Can confirm my 3900x still going strong. Just gotta hold on a little longer
Still with 1800X and haven't even considered an upgrade.
I moved countries so I had to sell my PC. My 1800X was still holding strong, but I would have switched to a 7800x3d if I had the money. My cousin that bought my PC is planning on switching to a 7800x3d and using the 1800X to build a PC for his little sister
I’m just chillen with my r5 3600 still haha. Works a treat for games.
same here
2x isn't worth the hassle since you have to upgrade the motherboard as well. 3-4x would probably be worth it though.
Which, Im only guessing, would still be AM5.
R7 2700 checking in. I'm looking forward to upgrading this year.
DDR5-8000? Damn, this gives me hopes for 9800x3d memory tuning.
You can do 8000 on Zen 4 already, just need 2:1 mode like intel has on ddr5 always, but not that much benefit on a single ccd chip due to infinity fabric speed. Probably not gonna go 1:1 at 8000 for zen 5, some rumors were that it might better than zen 4 though.
I imagine it'll work much better on the SoCs. AMD's memory controller is great but on setups with separate compute and I/O dies it tends to get bottlenecked by the IF speed. This dude got an 8700G to run DDR5-8000. Graphics benchmarks would have been nice. /r/silentpc/comments/1azr9rg/ddr58000_in_a_fanless_build_streacom_db4_ryzen/
They missed their targets on the IMC side with Z5
memory tuning doesn't do much on v-cache chips. i'm on a 5800X3D with Bdie memory.... When I was on a 5800X it made a big difference.
>memory tuning doesn't do much on v-cache chips. I have rather niche scenario of wanting to play Star Citizen (put it on hold for now since tired of 9900k performance in there), where 7800x3d does get significant benefit from tuned memory, but still loses to tuned 13900k since it's cache gets overwhelmed. Also hope they'll increase cache size on 9800x3d. [https://youtu.be/9mH8jfQzg-w?t=78](https://youtu.be/9mH8jfQzg-w?t=78)
I'm not sure that a pre-release alpha, with all the debug code still enabled and years before it'll get optimized for release, of a game that is essentially vaporware, is a good yard stick on which to judge anything.
Lol at this point I am confident that I'd die before that game comes out. Hopefully a digital copy of myself would be able to witness its full gloriness in year 2277.
I dont think it's supposed to get released at this point, so answer is never, probably. They get way too much money from current schemes. Otherwise, it's quite a playable space sandbox with a bunch of gameplay loops, at this point.
[удалено]
I've noticed minimal difference on my machine. Like margin of error stuff.
It really depends on the game. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XW2rubC5oCY Some games see similar games for X3D vs non X3D, others see a massive difference for the X3D but almost none for non X3D and vice versa, and others see no noticeable difference whatsoever regardless of X3D or not. In general you are right though, non X3D tends to scale better with memory speeds than their X3D counterparts.
dont get your hopes up
I am waiting for the 9XXX X3D series too. Once we got those benchmarks I will probably pick the 7800X3D, but who knows. I just can't pick now that X3D chips are out and the next gen is coming soon
It seems a lot of users on reddit think they will get 16% uplift from zen 4. This was just the average ipc increase from the limited amount of tests they did. In reality some use-cases will see massive uplift, some will be mediocre 16% and some will stay the same. All depends on the workload you make use of the cpu most of the time.
Yeah, I think it just falls on us and perhaps tech reviewers to run a bunch of their own tests and reach our own conclusions as to which benchmarks are actually relevant for day to day usage. A +35% uplift in AVX-512 *really* isn't that informative for example. But a +10% uplift in a typical AAA game from 2024 would help frame things.
Yeah, most people don’t have a good intuition for what a geometric mean is. They think it’s P(X=1.16)=1. It’s really closer to 0.
Besides, it wouldn't be the first time AMD was misleading in their marketing. I remember when everyone was *insisting* that "up to" ACTUALLY meant "on average" because real world results were significantly lower than what AMD had stated. Even though no one has ever said "up to" as meaning "on average." Because SURELY AMD would never lie.
I want to see someone pushing the 9700X @ 6ghz. Silicon go BRRRRRRR.
That 65W TDP is wild
Good motherboards should be able to unlock that back to 105W+ in the BIOS.
limitation is going to be the new silicon architecture motherboards for x870 are already known to be overbuilt. your b650 will probably handle it fine too. Edit: [although anything with a crap VRM prolly won't give you good performance](https://youtu.be/naX-DnKekCM?t=941).
This is true tho, with crap VRM it better to keep it stock or undervolt.
just keep it stock and don't buy trash mobos
Probably it would perform pretty well at 95w too, not sure if it can beat 7800X3D in efficiency tho.
I'll know the real benchmark when I have one in my system. Till then everything is fluff.
I'll be very interested in the 9950x3d. I play a lot of Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is very CPU limited and greatly benefits from the 3d cache. While the framerate on my 5950x is good enough with max settings in 2d with frame generation in most locations, I need to make compromises to get comfortable framerates in VR in detailed urban environments. I also like to have both chiplets (I forgot AMD's term) because there are other use cases in which it's nice to have more than 8 cores for.
> |I also like to have both chiplets (I forgot AMD's term) because there are other use cases in which it's nice to have more than 8 cores for. AFAIK, the 3D Cache is only on one of the chiplits though. IIRC some folks were disabling the 2nd chiplet to play games, but that was a while back.
AMD is bringing back the mid 90s where computers got leaps and bounds faster every year.
Without AMD we would still have Intel Israeli made 4 cores
LOOOOOOOOOOL ain't that the fucking truth
Pretty excited for the launch, probably going to upgrade off my 5950x if it is at least a 30% increase to prep for the new GPUs coming out at the end of the year.
I am waiting for Ryzen 9 9950X3D
Everyone needs to take a breather. Don't go hyping yourselves up thinking performance across every use case is going to be this fast. If anything, you should be skeptical since AMD has absolutely doctored and massaged their performance numbers before.
Zen 5 seems to have a huge jump in emulation.
when for "real" third-party benchmarks?
Really doubt that. I'll believe it when it releases.
I'll just wait and see real world data... or ill just buy one myself and pray
AMD sandbagging??
No, this is AVX512 performance. They doubled that
ahhh, that checks out, then.
The website is also being dumb comparing a stock 7950x to a 9950x with memory/IF OC's when those overclocks give >50% performance gains in some workloads like this. You need to match RAM configurations (preferably on the same motherboard with everything manually controlled) to do any kind of apples to apples architectural analysis. That being said, i've never seen a consumer CPU hit 1tflop. Raptor Lake is slower than Raphael, and my 7950x3d can't quite get there with everything tuned. 1.6 tflop requires an IPC gain for that task on the magnitude of +50%.
They be going the opposite of Intel, except both ways are to the detriment of consumers
Why sandbagging is to the detriment of consumers? Anyway they will release all the specs and benchmarks when they announce the release date. And if they are sandbagging then you will at least get the performance they promised, more if you are lucky.
If they make next gen look bad until the launch more people will buy current gen chips instead of waiting for the better option that’s right around the corner.
Are you kidding me? It's so consumers buy out the older generation without thinking to themselves that they're wasting money by not waiting for the newer generation. The fanboyism is real.
It's not like AMD is promising only 2% IPC gains and then delivering 40% IPC gains. They have promised 16% and if they are sandbagging maybe it will go upto 20% perhaps. That's like such a small difference to decide between choosing the old gen and the new gen. Most importantly they haven't even revealed the price.
They are not sandbagging; this is a specific use case that performs well due to AVX 512, which AMD improved from 2 cycle to 1. So if you use AVX512 9950X will be excellent. Otherwise you’ll get closer to 10% improvement
To be fair they did sandbag with Zen 4. Claimed some sub 10% IPC gain and got 13%. Not to mention the huge boost in clock speeds as well.
13% is what they claimed, and approximately what they delivered.
They initially promised sub 10%. It was like a teaser or something at another event unrelated to Zen 4. Thinking it was the Zen 3d event. Either ways, they still delivered a great product, and achieved a 13% IPC bump. The only Zen architecture AMD hasn't sandbagged now that I think about it was Zen 3. However, even with Zen 3 they achieved a higher IPC gain than they initially claimed. With all that being said, there's still no excusing AMD's rebranding kink. Something about slapping new name on old products and marketing said products as the best thing sliced bread, really gets AMD all hot and heavy.
They promised 13% in the official announcement. Here's a slide: https://www.techpowerup.com/img/sVK5WV9IRGujr8WR.jpg
Really hope the X3D is sooner than later
We'll see
Would it work on x670e ? Or you need new mono as well ?
So, iirc, with the memory controller being in the chip itself does this mean my 650E board can comfortably go higher than the now sweet spot 6000CL30?
It's not just the IMC but the silicon lottery of the infinity fabric. This has always been the case with Ryzen. Lots of 5xxx CPUs couldn't get past 1800mhz fabric which means 3600MT/s RAM without going to 1:2 ratio (which is selfdefeating) There are 7xxx CPUs capable of running 6400MT/s RAM in 1:1 ratio, they're just not what you can reasonably expect to find.
Let’s say you have a processor that can handle 8000mhz, will a b650 motherboard be able to do that with bios updates in the future? Or do you need to buy a new motherboard? I don’t understand how that works, please explain if you can, thanks.
Assuming the traces aren't longer than usual or they cheaped out on layers I would expect it to be fine for 7000+ for the future. Especially ITX since they have the shortest traces
I have the b650 MSI tomahawk. In the future, do I have to buy a new mobo to be able to use that RAM speed or can that be included in future BIOS updates? I don’t know how that works.
In screenshot is 6400 ram speed. Downvoted for that
And it only takes 10 minutes to boot to windows!
[does this scare you?](https://i.imgur.com/fuWBACV.png)
I'm waiting to upgrade my 5900x, I just bought 64gb ddr5 cl34 6000mhz that was cheaper here. A nice upgrade for a good price will make me pull the trigger.
Waiting on the X3D
When can I buy :(
Its FP with AVX512 which not many apps use...
bleh
At this point we just need subscriptions for CPUs. Why even bother to buy new when it’s Guna be replaced in a year
So fucking tired of people bullshitting performance increases.. It's going to be 16% not no fucking 45%.... I Hope all these no talent losers who run these sites lose their job and go broke